Skip to main content

View Diary: DNC hires RIAA shill (267 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You Think? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aexia, jmcgrew, Great Uncle Bulgaria

    Seem to me that Dean is going to hire the best person available for the job.

    Do you trust everything blogs say? Some people here do and have said so.  I have disagreed with them for a reason. Here is why"

    From the press release on the hiring:

    Jenni R. Engebretsen is currently the Director of Communications for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Washington, DC-based trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Before joining the RIAA, Engebretsen spent eight years working in Democratic politics, most recently as a Regional communications Director for the Kerry-Edwards for President campaign, where she was responsible for developing campaign communications strategy for top-targeted states including Florida and New Hampshire. During the 2004 presidential cycle, she also served as Deputy Communications Director for the Democratic National Convention in Boston and as Press Secretary for the Edwards for President campaign during the primaries. Before that, she worked on Capitol Hill in the communications offices of Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and in the White House press office during the Clinton Administration. She is a graduate of Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.

    OK? So she has some credentials as you see in this area of politics.

    "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

    by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:01:45 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Don't Trust Blogs (0+ / 0-)

      Don't ever ALWAYS trust blogs.

      As I have said here before - one blog posts something and gets it wrong and then another one and another one copies it as gospel. Kos is famous for that. This is not the first time you will find something here borrowed and posted where the info was wrong or the entire story was not told.

      We complain about the MSM doing this exact thing but it also happens on blogs all the time.

      Beware. Do your own google before ripping someone - especially when someone like Dean is involved.

      Who you going to believe - boing-boing or Howard Dean?

      nuff said.

      "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

      by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:05:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  in this case, trust blogs (3+ / 0-)

        There are tons of careerists who go back and forth between shilling for corporations and working to promote Democrats.  Ms. Engebretsen is one of them.

        Such people should pick.  Terry McAuliffe represented corporate Democrats.  We pushed for Howard Dean to shake things up.

        •  ??? (0+ / 0-)

          The point I was making was that she has credentials for the job. Neither boing boing nor Kos let any one know about that. That is exactly what the MSM does and we all despise that - I assume you do too. But yet here you are going to ignore that because you have a bias against the person? Sorry pal - fact are facts and that is what I was presenting. Maybe facts don't matter to you much and bias does, I don't know - but to me facts matter.

          As for your opinion that people should choose who they work for according to your criteria - I can only chuckle. You talk about corporations like they are all the most evil thing ever - yet you purchase products from them everyday and even listen to music that is done by artists who record for and are affiliated with corporate entities like RIAA. Who are you kidding? You probably bitched about Fox News and don't think twice about watching their broadcast TV shows. You are no purist would be my bet. I'll trust Dean's judgment over yours thank you.

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:13:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I don't automatically give Dean (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        talex, alizard, BOBAUBIN com

        the benefit of the doubt just cause he's The Howard Dean. I will say he is one of the few individuals alive who's run for President that I would trust further than I could throw, which is saying something.

        Anyway, I agree with you that her non-RIAA resume makes this hire a lot easier to swallow, although (as violently as I loathe the fucking RIAA) my concern in this instance is less about the RIAA in particular and more about the revolving door between the public and private sectors.

        Then again, spokespeople are spokespeople....it's a dirty job and lots of people seem to be willing to do it, so they might as well, I suppose....

        Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

        by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:22:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Revolving Door (0+ / 0-)

          Someone like Engebretsen, who is not an elected politician, would find it impossible to not move between public and private. There is no guarantee that she can always be employed by government or politicians. So if she wants to serve the public sector with her talents must can do so only when asked. When that gig is up and there is not other public offer she must go where she can make a living with her talents.

          As for the RIAA it always amazes me that people get pissed at them for doing what may be illegal things - but never mention that if people were not STEALING music ILLIEGALLY then what the RIAA does would not have to be done.

          It is the thieves who turns the RIAA into what they have had to become. But yet not a peep about that here on this blog.

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:49:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  re: stealing (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            alizard, BOBAUBIN com

            we'll just have to agree to disagree on the revolving door.

            But as far as downloading goes....the five dollar word of the day is rivalry.

            The problem is that stealing an mp3 is not preventing anyone else from listening to that song. The artist is still able to play the song; a physical copy hasn't been removed from a shelf, causing a loss to a retailer; the person who encoded the mp3 retains a copy, etc. People have gotten so used to music living on pieces of plastic or coming out of boxes that they are convinced that music is something they can "own." You can't. Music is vibrating air molecules, man, it can't be owned, not by anybody. It has no physical form of any sort. It is made of patterns and ephemera.

            Think about it like this....is a photograph of a painting the same thing as the painting itself? If art lovers suddenly stopped paying to get into museums and contented themselves with looking at pictures of pictures, would they be stealing?

            I agree that the economics of the music industry are dire, and I agree wholeheartedly that musicians (and software engineers, for example) need to be paid for their work. The crux of the problem is that digital music is not a rivalrous good, and no one--no one!--has yet devised a business model that can be applied industry-wide that takes this into account. And no, iTunes doesn't cut it. I'll be surprised if iTunes is around in five years.

            By the way, this is the second coming of this argument....we had this fight once before when blank cassette tapes were introduced. The people that own the technological formats are trying to dictate to everybody else what they can and cannot do with something once it has been sold. If I buy a car from Ford, Ford can't tell me what to do with it once it's been sold. If I buy a CD, it's nobody's business but mine what I do with that later. I can resell it, I can give it away, or I can stuff it in a box in the attic. I can dub it to a blank tape and give the tape to a friend--people freaked out when that became possible, but it didn't cause the end of the world. Now any fool with a computer can make a more-or-less perfect copy of anything in minutes, and this (along with the internet, P2P technology, and other factors) is causing the collapse of the entire structure of the industry.

            Some people say save what can't be saved. I say roll with the punches and figure out something that's a bit more equitable than the old system was.

            One last thing....I hope that I'm misreading your last paragraph....the RIAA are thieves because everybody else is? Do you really think that?

            Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

            by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 07:13:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  OK... (0+ / 0-)

              so you don't think people should be able to work in the private sector and then apply their talents in government when the opportunity presents itself. So what does that leave us with - career politicians and civil servants who must stay in government and if they ever leave they cannot come back?

              But oh wait - you probably think career politicians are bad also - so you are in a hell of a quandary aren't you? Thank goodness everyone doesn't think as illogically as you seem to.

              As for digital music - yeah I get you point. You are saying that you think you should be able to download an artists work for free. Even though it is creative work that is copyrighted - fuck them, just fuck them. Oh yeah - you don't say fuck them - you say "equitable". Equitable? What did you do to create and record the music - not a damned thing.

              And you probably bitch that you don't make enough money for what you do for a living. You deserve more money for yourself and artists deserve less.

              Good luck pal - you are one hell of a Democrat.

              "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

              by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 11:02:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Digital Music.... (6+ / 0-)

                Copyrights and IP were put into place so that I couldn't make money off of your work. NOT to Create a Business Model and structure that allows you to make money. It is only through years of corporate friendly  legislation and court findings that the current system is in place. Think about how illogic music distribution is....If I buy a CD I have the right to listen to the music from the CD. But I don't have the right to copy that music to an MP3 on my computer. If I would have bought the album on iTunes but decided it was easier to rip from CD to mp3, it could be said that I have circumvented the content protection and I am guilty of violating the DCMA. Radio Stations can broadcast music for everybody to hear, after paying a hefty sum to the "owners". So, I have to right to listen the radio and hear Britney Spears for free, but I don't have the right to listen to that music whenever I want unless I've paid for a physical or digital copy. And If it's a digital copy, that I've paid for, I can't listen to it on my music streamer or PDA, because neither supports Apple's DRM. If I make digital copies from a CD I bought, I'm breaking the law.

                I'm still pondering whether I'm allowed to borrow someone else's CD and listen to it. Or whether I'm allowed to play my CD when someone else is within listening range, or If I'm allowed to after verifying that they have paid for it.

                Also, I've purchased many CDs over the years which have been destroyed, either by accident, purposefully, or by apathy, or lost, or lended out and never returned. Since I've paid for these, shouldn't I be able to download another copy for free?

                Is the value in the plastic of the CD? the bits contained on the CD? The amount of labor it took to get the bits on the CD? the amount of heartache and emotion that the artist put into the song?

                Why is it that all songs are currently worth 99 cents?

                There is no inherent monetary value in music. The only value is that in which people are willing to pay, and without IP law and doctrine, there is no music business.

                And also, I'm about tired of this "the artists need to get paid." Your work isn't art. Artists are poor.

                If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people.

                It's a product. You are a producer. You judge your work by how much money it makes you. And for your product (sorry...your "Art") to have a viable business model, you need to control the manufactoring, distribution, and legal framework within which you operate. The music companies and RIAA could have embraced the changing technology infrastructure and provided consumers with better or additional services and technology, but they didn't. In their greed and comfortably monopoly of $14.00 per CD, they did nothing, and now they have lost control of the manufactoring and distribution channels and their only hope is restrict the advance of technology. Their only hope is through the legislative process. Eff the RIAA and Music companies. Eff DRM. They can't stop piracy. And in their attempts they alienate paying customers like me. I'm not gonna pay for music that I can't utilize however I feel fit. Protected AAC from Apple..yeah right..MP3 from a million other sources.

                •  a 1,000 4s (3+ / 0-)

                  you get it, man....thanks.

                  I'm still pondering whether I'm allowed to borrow someone else's CD and listen to it. Or whether I'm allowed to play my CD when someone else is within listening range, or If I'm allowed to after verifying that they have paid for it.

                  No kidding....if a lawyer thought he could figure out how to call that a "performance" and demand fees per additional listener, nothing would stop him....

                  I do have to quibble with this though....

                  And also, I'm about tired of this "the artists need to get paid." Your work isn't art. Artists are poor.

                  If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people.

                  Look, I don't mind not being filthy rich, but I still have bills, and playing music comes with a substantial overhead (gear, parts for the gear, gas money, hotels, etc)....I don't need big bucks, but I'd like a smidgen of financial stability....

                  In their greed and comfortably monopoly of $14.00 per CD, they did nothing, and now they have lost control of the manufactoring and distribution channels and their only hope is restrict the advance of technology.

                  Absolutely. And if history shows anything, it shows that getting in the way of technology typically doesn't work out very well....

                  Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                  by nota bene on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:22:01 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Too Funny (0+ / 0-)

                  "If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people."

                  So according to you artist should be starving artists who should be happy with being recognized. TFF. You guys think up the lamest excuses to be able to not pay for things.

                  I can only hope that you reap what you sow and that your boss thinks that underpaying you is fine and that you should be happy that he appreciates that you work for so little and that you have a job at all. Accept that scenario and you will be congruent with how you feel artists should be treated.

                  Copying a CD to your MP3 player or making copies for a few friends is a lot different than distributing it across the internet where your computer on a P2P networks could literally distribute it to thousands if not millions of people. If you toiled hard to create something to sell so you could make a living from it and someone demanded to get it for free via the internet you probably would not like that anymore than a music artist.

                  The internet is a convenience tool to communicate with and was never intended to be a vehicle to steal someones creativity and work. Just because something is on the internet does not mean it should be free. This blog is not even free if you look at the ads that it takes to make it keep running. Your access to the internet itself is not free. It costs time and money to build and maintain the infrastructure and keep up with the technology and that is what you pay for. it is no difference with a musician - it takes them time and money to create what they do and they need to be paid also.

                  "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                  by talex on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:02:59 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  and how much is astroturfing worth (0+ / 0-)

                    as a "creative art"? You seem to be the guy to ask about that sort of thing. Do you have ANY opinions that aren't part of some major corporation's Party Line?

                    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                    by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:35:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  How is making a few copies for a few friends (0+ / 0-)

                    any different? Because you know them? Because, they are your friends and since you paid for it, they shouldn't have to? Making one copy is as illegal as making a million. How about you get a coherent position on the matter?

                    The internet is a convienence tool (?) and was never intended to be a vehicle for theft? I can as easily state that copyright law was never intended to create a monopolistic economic and technological infrastructure to support your "art".

              •  fuck you (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                alizard, BOBAUBIN com

                I am a professional musician. I write, perform, and record music for a living, and I will admit to being pissed off that I don't make more money.

                I don't appreciate how you're putting words in my mouth.

                I think that my observations about digital music are merely that--observations--and that I'd love to be able to pay my fucking bills via a recording contract with a giant record label. But the technological landscape has changed and music will change with it, just as it has throughout history. I am a student of music history and I know that the modern record business is a new thing in music years. Before 1920 or so in order to hear music you had to either be in the same room with musicians or play it yourself. Now we're on our third generation since the thing got started and it's become entrenched, but the system is falling apart. I believe the record industry as we know it is to be a recent phenomenon, and one that should not dictate the economics of the entire music world, since the business model is so obviously fucked. (Pop quiz--what's it cost more to manufacture, a cassette or a CD?)

                The RIAA is trying to put the genie back in the bottle and it's not going to happen. I don't think it's necessarily a good thing, but I think it's inevitable and we may as well get started on the new model already.

                Re: copyright: copyright law in America has been written by Disney. Copyright is important but the laws have gone too far, and they are being exploited in order to turn profits for those who are not responsible for the creation of work.

                Since you seem to have me so well figured out about the revolving door, I guess I'll let you argue for me. You don't appear to be interested in having a worthwhile discussion, so go ahead and knock yourself out without me.

                Good luck pal - you are one hell of a Democrat.

                Who the fuck do you think you are? You got a lot of nerve to say something like that.

                Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                by nota bene on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:12:41 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  fuck me? (1+ / 1-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Bill W
                  Hidden by:
                  alizard

                  What an ass!

                  No one is putting words in your mouth - I am just making "observations" and they are merely that --observations.

                  Yeah you can go on talking about the changing landscape if you want. Keep talking like that and you will never make the money you'd like to make because you talk against your own best interest and the interests of all artists. But then it is understandable because no one ever said that most musicians were great business people. Plenty have been short changed and ripped off because they didn't take care of their own business. You sound destined for the same.

                  "and they are being exploited in order to turn profits for those who are not responsible for the creation of work."

                  Distribution is part of any business. Without distribution all products, including music would not make a cent. Even radio stations are part of the distribution system and they make money off the music. Got a problem with that?

                  Good luck to you pal - you haven't got a clue to how commerce works. You live in some idealistic world where others create and you get it for free.

                  I suggest you live by that motto. You're a musician so sit down and spend weeks of your time writing some music.

                  Then go pay for some studio time to record it professionally.

                  Then pay for a website and bandwidth to upload it to.

                  Then spend some more time calling radio stations to play your music for free and have them mention your website so people can go there...

                  And download it for free.

                  Repeat that for the rest of your life and die broke.

                  "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                  by talex on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:21:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  what part of Clear Channel (0+ / 0-)

                    monopoly don't you understand?

                    Of course, you probably cheered Clear Channel when they stopped playing Dixie Chicks tracks on their FM network because the Dixie Chicks didn't toe the GOP Party Line on Iraq.

                    I TR'd you for contributing pure noise to the signal-to-noise ratio of this discussion. You obviously know nothing of entertainment economics, only that the record industry is a corporate institution and that you must support them.

                    I look forward to your support of the banking industry when repeal of the bankruptcy bill comes up to discussion.

                    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                    by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:19:26 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  a question of morality (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Progressive Moderate

                    and yes, I agree that it isn't fair to ask you questions that are way outside your field of competence.

                    Why is it legal to record to analog tape off the radio and illegal to record to digital formats?

                    BTW, two bands became major bands because people heard their stuff through the (analog) tape trading scene.

                    One is the Grateful Dead.

                    Who's the other one?

                    Hint: their name starts with "M".

                    This are questions for the RIAA fanboys, informed people already know the answers.

                    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                    by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:24:36 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  since you obviously don't understand (0+ / 0-)

                digital copyright issues, STFU while people who do discuss them, you might learn something. Even if only how to be a better corporate shill.

                Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:13:48 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  you've got an example closer to home (0+ / 0-)

        as to why information posted on blogs should not be believed without checking.

        You are the example. Anyone who'd call himself a "progressive" and spend his online time shilling for FoxNews and the RIAA is a waste of oxygen.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:11:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Right, and then she was the Mouth of the RIAA (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jake Nelson, jmcgrew
      So let's hear her say "Sorry, those guys are total dicks," and we can move on.

      --

      The President is not my master. He is Chief among my servants.

      by DemCurious on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 05:38:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh! (0+ / 0-)

        Then you don't listen to music any more? Because if you do then the artists you listen to are represented by the RIAA.

        If you don't listen to recorded music then fine. But if you do you are practicing hypocrisy.

        So do you listen to recorded music?

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:16:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that's a stretch (4+ / 0-)

          the RIAA are a bunch of flaming shitheads. None of those fucking assholes are actually playing any music, so I don't see what the connection is.

          The RIAA does not have artists' best interest in mind. In the modern record industry the artists (and the customers, for that matter) are at the bottom of the fucking pyramid. The record industry is a bunch of non-musical fucking barnacles that have grafted themselves into what was a very simple relationship (musicians --> audience) and made it far more complex than it ever needed to be.

          They're a mob of lawyers, bean-counters, salesmen, philistines, and empty suits. They have nothing to do with music.

          Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

          by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:28:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Stretch? (0+ / 0-)

            By virtue of recording for one of the 90% of the labels out there artists endorse the RIAA to protect their right to be paid for their music which 'is in the artists best interest' - unless of course you think you should get their music free of charge.

            If you listen to anything other than non-RIAA indies then you actually SUPPORT that which you bitch about. That's fact.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:38:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  no (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rogun, alizard

              I think the modern record industry (barely eighty years old or so) as a business model has reached its utter limit, and as you would expect, the individuals and entities who are invested in the old order are fighting tooth and nail to preserve what can't be preserved.

              I think that music existed long before there was a record industry to exploit it, and I think that music will exist just fine without the fucking RIAA. By the way, I think you're confusing the RIAA with performing rights societies like ASCAP. Despite their claims to the contrary, the Recording Industry Association of America does not represent artists, it represents labels, which, if you haven't been living under a rock, are notorious for ripping off both artists and consumers.

              Boycotting any music made for a Big Four label is like the fundies trying to boycott Disney....it's awfully hard to be that pure. It's everywhere in modern culture and that's exactly what's fucked up about it. Through very effective (if ethically questionable) business practices, the RIAA and the labels it represents have come to totally dominate what you hear, just like ClearChannel owns as much of the broadcast market as they're legally allowed to. Just like Microsoft is on nearly every computer. Ad naus.

              The thing is, music is a basic human impulse and people get pretty touchy when you start fucking with it for profit. So you tell me, I'm eating mac and cheese every other night but Mr. Record Executive is paid nicely, and I'm supposed to be happy about that? Fuck that shit. I want to go back to 1900, when I played for you in person and I got paid for that instead of being forced to turn myself into a salesman of little pieces of plastic in order to make a living.

              Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

              by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:54:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  talex's citing of the RIAA (0+ / 0-)

                as an organization that collects money for artists demonstrates that he knows nothing about the music industry and has no right to expect anyone to respect his opinion on the subject. His only intention here is to disrupt a discussion he's uncomfortable with.

                Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:21:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site